list_repos

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond listing. It does not mention that the operation is read-only, nor does it discuss rate limits, authentication requirements, or pagination. The behavior of omitting the owner parameter is described in the schema, but not reiterated in the description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with 9 words, containing no unnecessary information. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple, but the description lacks details about return values, pagination, or behavioral expectations. Without an output schema, the description should provide more context for an agent to understand what the tool returns and how to handle it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline for this dimension.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('List repositories') and the scoping options ('for a user, organization, or the authenticated user'). It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools that perform other actions like creating branches or issues, but does not explicitly contrast them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention specific contexts, prerequisites, or situations where a different tool would be more appropriate. Sibling tools such as 'list_pull_requests' are not referenced.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.